Tonight's episode of Fringe is one of its best, but you might do well to be getting excited about a future episode of the series. Episode 19 of the season is bringing in a guest star from that other great J.J. Abrams series, LOST. Henry Ian Cusick, better known as Desmond Hume, will guest star, according to TVLine.

Cusick will play an FBI agent assigned to a Fringe case, though it's unknown which universe he's from. TVLine speculates that Cusick's role is that of an "Alternate Universe Agent" who "possesses strength and confidence as well as strong comic timing."

Cusick's not exactly known for his comic timing, but I wouldn't put it beyond him -- the man can act. At the moment, the role looks like it'll be a one-off guest star, but I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that it would be absolutely fantastic to see Cusick recur.

Cusick, of course, starred on LOST, which was also created by J.J. Abrams. Writers Jeff Pinkner and David Fury have also worked on both shows. Star Lance Reddick appeared in a recurring role on LOST, and LOST star Jorge Garcia had a guest role on Fringe. There is plenty of overlap between the two shows, but we get excited with every new connection that's made.

Fringe airs tonight, February 10, with the fantastic episode "Welcome to Westfield."

Fringe Nabs Lost Star Henry Ian Cusick for Guest Role

Alcatraz unlocks its first episode series premiere event from the mind of J.J. Abrams with tonight's pilot "Jack Sylvane," as Detective Rebecca Madsen (Sarah Jones) finds herself embroiled in a mind-boggling mystery of how 1960's Alcatraz inmates are re-surfacing in present day San Francisco with murderous intent.  Alcatraz certainly holds promise going forward, but isn't quite the dramatic hook some of Abrams' past TV works have been.

I first saw Alcatraz when they screened the pilot episode at San Diego Comic-Con, though I confess to drifting in and out of attention, owing partly to other assignments of previous Ballroom 20 panels, a lack of anything particularly grabbing within the pilot itself, and just a brutal, brutal hangover from all the socializing the night before.

So while I could have done a better job on focusing on what does, and doesn’t work about Alcatraz the first time around, the eminent prestige of J.J. Abrams and its sci-fi premise would inevitably draw me back in for further viewing.

Then, I found out they re-tooled the pilot a bit from what was shown, and I couldn’t be sure whether what I had watched recently in FOX’s online screening room was the original or the updated version.  Even with that dilemma, re-tooling pilots always bodes ill for a series.  So keep in mind that what you see from Alcatraz’s series premiere tonight wasn’t always present, and serves to highlight a few points FOX obviously found problematic, notably a lack of character for lead Rebecca Madsen (Sarah Jones).  Near as I can tell, none of the original pilot dealt with the death of her partner, her difficulting in working with others, or her grandfather already resurfacing in present day.

I also did a bit of research into other reactions to the pilot, many of which hit some of the same points, that conceptually Alcatraz seems like a cool idea for series and a smart blend of sci-fi with the procedural, but little else.  Clearly the writers are setting up some kind of larger sci-fi conspiracy to explain where the 302 Alcatraz prisoners and guards have been for 40 years, but beyond that most of the action simply lies in unremarkable characters following somewhat typical cop-show beats.  I’m reminded of specific comments* from J.J. Abrams on how he envisioned Alcatraz as a less serialized, inmate-of-the-week type series that anyone could find accessible by jumping on to random episodes during the season, and that mentality certainly shows.

(*) Others have also pointed out that in discussing the show Abrams drew on the same “Alias as over-serialized” anecdote he used when first describing Fringe, which hit its creative stride by embracing longer story arcs, not avoiding them.

The basic synopsis of Alcatraz unfolds as troubled young detective Rebecca Madsen and Alcatraz expert Dr. Diego Soto (Jorge Garcia) find themselves drawn into the murder investigation of a former Alcatraz staff member, apparently by long-dead inmate Jack Sylvane.  Once they uncover too many details of the seemingly impossible murder, secretive FBI agent Emerson Hauser (Sam Neill) recruits them as part of the larger investigation of why Alcatraz inmates are re-appearing un-aged in present day with murderous intent.

With 302 names on the roster to investigate and a host of unanswered questions, Alcatraz’ pilot leaves plenty of room to grow, but could use a little work in developing its characters.  Madsen seems to have a colorful enough past, but we don’t grasp much of a clear hook for why she finds herself so drawn to the Alcatraz cases, or even how impossible they seem.  As I mentioned earlier FOX seems to have beefed up her grandfather’s role in the mystery, but that shoehorning doesn’t illustrate much of a real connection she has to the man other than blood, or her surrogate uncle (Robert Forster).

Diego Soto on the other hand, everyone loves Hurley, but the pilot doesn’t give the good doctor much to do beyond a couple of “gee whiz” reactions and a few dots about Alcatraz to connect.  Sam Neill’s Emerson Hauser emerges as a frontrunner for the most intriguing character thus far, but I wouldn’t trust J.J. Abrams to show his hand so quickly.  By the same token I expect that whatever orders they might have, each inmate (or guard) the team encounters from the past will run the gamut of emotions, as Alcatraz’ pilot seems inconsistent on portraying Jack Sylvane as sympathetic and remorseless.  We feel for him given his plight and unfair treatment in prison, but those sympathies don’t quite gel with his unrepentantly violent nature.  I haven’t seen the second episode FOX will air along with the pilot, so we’ll see if character motivations become any clearer.

I’ll definitely keep up with Alcatraz going forward, but I might dip more into the recap side rather than review, unless the show manages to grow out of its more generic cop show conventions.  Really, must every leading detective be a loose cannon with family issues that no one else works well with?

See?  Not everything needs to draw heavy LOST comparisons.

And Another Thing…

• We'll be back with a recap of the second episode "Ernest Cobb" later, but you can also check out our extensive Alcatraz coverage, including set visits, and interviews with Executive Producer Jack Bender, Jorge Garcia, Sarah Jones and others.

• Should we start a pool of crazy theories to explain the science-fiction?  My money’s on either cloning, or cryogenics given the additional hospital ward experiment scenes added to the pilot.  Time travel seems like it might be a little grand for this show.

• For funsies, take a shot every time someone dramatically reminds another that “THIS IS ALCATRAZ!”

• Unless I'm mistaken, the current version of the pilot also removes a scene in which Sylvane recieves cryptic, almost hypnotizing instructions from a payphone call, something they may have wanted to keep more ambiguous at first.

• Man, the guy they got to play a young Sam Neill looks creepy.

What did YOU think?

Alcatraz 1.01 "Jack Sylvane" Series Premiere Review

Just like every character on LOST, I'm struggling with my past. No, I'm not struggling with a heroin addiction, and no, I didn't order the genocide of everyone I once knew. My problem is much more of a struggle: it's becoming much harder for me to not be a pretentious ass. Though to be fair, if there's ever been a time where I deserved to be a know-it-all, this is indeed it.

Let me give you a little context here. LOST has a lot of emotional resonance for me because of my grandfather, who convinced me to start watching the series in the third season but died during the fifth. I consider LOST to be the show that initiated me into culture; after all, I was twelve when I started watching and sixteen when it ended. I watched the show religiously in those four years (don't worry, I watched seasons one and two on DVD), and it ended up being a formative experience for me. I learned more about philosophy, literature, and film by watching LOST and interacting with the show's community than I have anywhere else. I became an administrator for Lostpedia in 2009, and that led to me writing here, at TVOvermind. Jon Lachonis might have declared that LOST ate his life, but it shaped mine.

Flashforward two years (nothing new for LOST fans) to January 2012: the present. I've just finished the first week of my four-week class "LOST: My Religion," my course for the school's January interim term. Nothing could really describe how ecstatic I was when I discovered that such a class was being offered (I must have said "No way," at least fifteen or sixteen times). And now, at the end of week 1, I have to say that I absolutely love the class. There's only one problem: I can't help but feel that it's all about me.

The class centers upon religious and philosophical themes in the show. After all, there are plenty to go around. But aside from the teacher (who is, naturally, a really cool guy), I think I'm the only one who has seen the entire show. I've never been particularly great at humility, and so I can't help but feel a little smug when I hear my classmates (who are watching it for the first time) asking what the monster is, or why Rousseau is on the Island. I also can't help but feel a little smug when I can call into use my encyclopedic knowledge of the show (which I haven't really watched since it went off the air, though I still remember most details). I have to work really hard not to fully nerd out and make everyone hate me. Its a fine line, and sometimes I cross it, like that one time I let slip that Boone dies (totally didn't mean to).

For our textbooks, we're using Chris Seay's The Gospel According to LOST and Pearson Moore's Lost Humanity. While I'm totally digging Moore's analysis of the show, I can't say I feel the same way about Seay's book, which doesn't really uncover anything new other than vague thematic similarities between the show and the Bible. The fact that it was written before season six, arguably the show's most spiritual season, doesn't help things.

I'm about to start work on my first assignment, a five-page presentation of a thematic element of LOST. I haven't decided what I'm going to write about yet. I have decided that my final project, analysis of a character's religious implications, will be about Daniel Faraday (my favorite character) and predestination.

I promise that my blog entry for next week will be less self-centered... Actually, no, I don't. Like plenty of other fans who blogged, or edited Lostpedia, or discussed the show online, I feel like I was a part of LOST. This class is all about me.

A Lostpedia Administrator Takes a Class on LOST: Week 1

Once Upon a Time, the new ABC series from LOST executive producers/writers Adam Horowitz and Eddy Kitsis that debuts on Sunday, redefines the concept of ‘happily ever after.’ The series is a deliciously clever spin on familiar and beloved tales and characters, presented in two vastly different worlds. Characters living in modern-day Storybrooke are alive, but they don't remember who they once were in fairytale land; characters living in fairytale land are not aware of their contemporary counterparts. The show will explore the origins of all characters, as the future of both worlds is in their hands.

Initially I was hesitant to use the words ‘magical’ and ‘whimsical’ to describe Once, because I wondered whether or not that would turn potential male viewers away. While Once is not a sci-fi show, there are aspects of the series that may require the same suspension of disbelief that we all so eagerly apply to shows like Fringe and LOST.

I strongly believe that Once will appeal to both genders of all ages, because regardless of what your childhood was like - you had one. And your active imagination will hit on all cylinders when you watch the show. You will find yourself smiling when you recognize specific names and scenes coming to life from the pages of your bedtime stories, and very entertained by the fresh perspectives on the tales that you grew up reading and listening to.

At Comic-Con earlier this year, I had the opportunity to sit down with the creative team at a press roundtable after the Once Upon a Time panel. Here are the highlights.

Horowitz: “These stories are so iconic and ingrained in all of us. There is a deep well to draw from, but we want to start with this core group of characters - take our time and explore who they really are. These are the first stories you hear as a child, so for two people who grew up wanting to be writers – that was your first influence. Once the show got picked up, we watched Sleeping Beauty again, and it opens in the same way. We hadn’t watched that since we were children! You don’t realize the subconscious; it gets so stuck in you – the archetypes of good and evil. All these themes begin there. It’s not just about storytelling, it is about living your life.”

Kitsis: “What we wanted to do was take the icon to the person. We want to see what Snow White is like as a woman. What would Snow White really be like? “

Horowitz: “When we sat down to write those scenes in particular (referring to the relationship between Snow White and Prince Charming), we realized – they’re a real couple. That became our guideline for everything we did in the fairytale land. The reality.  All of the other stuff around it is fun to see, but if we have that baseline of reality, then there is something we can relate to, that makes the characters feel real.”

Kitsis: “For us, this series is about hope. That’s what I love about fairytales.”

Horowitz: “On every level, from the dialogue to the set dressing – we are making sure that the stories are thematically connected. There is a reason for everything you’re watching.”

Kitsis: “We learned on LOST that it is character first. I want to know why the Evil Queen hates Snow White. Why did she go to these lengths?  That may be answered in an episode - but if you weren’t asking that question when you get the answer – it doesn’t detract from watching it.”

Horowitz: “Our goal is that you can put on your slippers, lean back and enjoy the episode of the week. But if you look closely…you will see things in there that carry on from week to week.”

Kitsis: “Sure, there are LOST shout-outs. We try to put little things in, because that’s what we love.”

[editorial sidenote: there are many obvious and subtle nods throughout the pilot!]

Horowitz: “We have a plan of where we’d love to go, given the opportunity.”

Kitsis: “We’ve been given 12 episodes. We don’t know if we’ll ever get more than that. We are trying to make the best 12, and THEN we’ll worry about what’s in the hatch.”

The ensemble cast of Once, comprised of many recognizable film and TV alum, is fantastic: Lee Arenberg (Pirates of the Caribbean). Robert Carlyle (SGU Stargate Universe). Josh Dallas (Thor). Giancarlo Esposito (Breaking Bad; yes, Gus Fring has transitioned into the Magic Mirror). Jared Gilmore (Mad Men). Ginnifer Goodwin (Big Love). Jennifer Morrison (House). Lana Parrilla (Swingtown). Raphael Sbarge (Prison Break). In addition, LOST fans will be happy to note that the former Charles Widmore (Alan Dale) has also joined the cast of Once, to play Prince Charming’s father.  True Blood’s Kristen Bauer will also be appearing as Maleficent in the second episode.

Once Upon a Time is a journey, an adventure down memory lane with unusual twists and turns, and a series that successfully intertwines the darker moments with amusing homage. Among all Fall 2011 TV pilots that I viewed before they aired, Once stood out as the most unique, and as the only new show that feels more like an experience than a series. And after recently viewing the third episode (screeners are often available out of order), I am confident in my original assertion that Once is indeed the best new show of the season and definitely season-pass worthy.

Introduce yourself to both worlds on Sunday at 8pm on ABC, when Once Upon a Time debuts. If you’d like to watch the entire pilot beforehand, it is available right now on IMDB!

Don't forget to join Eddy Kitsis and Adam Horowitz for a live chat on Facebook today from 1:30pm-2:00pm EST, and follow the official show via Twitter.

Welcome to "Once Upon a Time" - The Best New Show of 2011

Listening to Damon Lindelof admit that he wanted to quit LOST – more than once – makes you wonder what would have happened if the statement had actually come to pass. There would certainly be no polar bears or hatches. Maybe not even the game-changing character flashbacks and flash-forwards. Lindelof, who created the concept of the show along with JJ Abrams back in 2003, will be the first to admit that he thought LOST would never get picked up (much less become a smash hit or run for six consecutive seasons.) Yet hearing stories about his experiences on both a personal and professional level, you begin to wonder how he ever could have thought otherwise.

Without question, Lindelof is an absolute pleasure to listen to - not only because of his expertise, but because of the obvious devotion and passion he has for his work. At last week’s New York Television Festival, Lindelof sat down for a one-on-one with MTV’s Andrew Jenks to deliver the keynote address and speak candidly about his beloved show. The fact that it was exactly seven years to the day LOST first premiered on ABC seemed to be no coincidence.

In an exclusive interview preceding the panel, I had the opportunity to chat with Lindelof as he reflected on seven years gone by, what he would’ve changed (a trick question!), and his plans for future creative ventures.

It’s been seven years since the airing of the pilot. If you could go back – knowing what you know now, knowing the writing process, knowing what’s to come – what would you tell yourself? Would you change anything?

I have to preface that answer by saying what happened, happened and it’s impossible to travel back in time and change the outcome at all. And I mean that not by way of jest. I feel like if I could travel back, what I would tell myself is to relax, take it easy, let the show tell us what it wanted to be and try not to get too overwhelmed by it all. But at the same time, I feel that if I hadn’t gone through that entire process, the show might’ve been something entirely different. The panic and catastrophic experience that it was - especially the first year - really translated onto the screen in, I think, an overwhelmingly positive way for the show. Although the philanthropic thing to do would be to go back, ease my pain, hold my own hand…

At the time, anyone who knows me will tell you I was absolutely convinced that there were no more than six episodes of this show. And I was so terrified when they picked it up, and when I would say this to people, they would sort of laugh and think I was being modest or self-effacing. And then I would get home and tell my wife, who was my fiancé at the time, “But I’m not joking!” If I went back and told that guy the morning after on September 23rd, which was one of the saddest days of my life, “Don’t worry; this thing’s gonna go six seasons,” I would’ve said, “Six years; no way!” It’s probably a good thing that non-paradoxical time travel does not exist.

Did you ever think the show would be such a hit? Was there ever any thought in your mind that maybe it could work if it got the right audience or the right time slot? Or was did you really think no one would ever watch it?

It’s so funny for you to ask that question through the prism of ‘I’m really thinking now about what that day was like seven years ago, the night that the show premiered.’ And I haven’t really thought about it with any degree of substance because I kind of lump it into the overall experience of the show premiering and getting really good ratings. But when we were shooting the pilot, JJ and Bryan [Burk] and I would constantly be saying things like, “This is going to be the best show ever!” We were going to give you all this fun stuff and blow up stuff and have polar bears running through the jungle and have people flying out the back of planes, but we were like, “This is the best show ever that’s going to be cancelled.” We really got it into our heads that the best case scenario was going to be kind of like a Prisoner of War legacy, where we made 13 of these things and then it became a cult classic where it was cancelled prematurely and wouldn’t that be cool. In our brains, it was just kind of a cult-y show, you know, sort of catered to our own geeky sensibilities.

It wasn’t until I saw the pilot for the first time and realized how character driven and emotional it was, and what amazing performances all the actors had given us, that I started wondering whether or not the show could connect on a somewhat broader audience. But on this day seven years ago, JJ had a party at his house for the premiere. The actors were all in Hawaii shooting, but the entire LA production entity, we all went over there and watched it. And that night there was an ABC executive who was there who said, “Hey, listen, we do research at ABC to get some sense of how these shows are going to do and we’re kind of optimistic about this thing. We think it’s probably going to do about a 3.4 in the demo. And if you can stay above the 3 at 8pm on Wednesdays, you’re gonna be just fine.” And I remember hearing that number and being like, “Okay, that’s what we’re trying to hit.” And that sounded about right to me. At that time, in 2004, that number would’ve been a success or a survivor or a performer, or whatever they would’ve called it. Hit was never really part of the terminology as far as I was concerned and certainly, no one was telling me that this was going to be a massive hit. The show was being really well reviewed; there were a number of magazines like EW and TV Guide that said this is the best new show of the fall, but they offered that up with the caveat of ‘this is a great pilot but where is it going to go from there?’ So, in my mind, that was kind of it. “Groundbreaking” was never an adjective in my wildest dreams that I thought would ever be associated with the show unless it was in front of ‘cancelled after one episode.’

The landscape of television has really changed in the past seven years and I feel if the show premiered now, it wouldn't get the same reception. We’re so accustomed to getting everything at our fingertips, we need answers to be delivered at this moment, and we get fed up if we don’t get them after 2 or 3 episodes. We’ve become a lot less inclined to really invest in a show, especially a serial show.

That pilot asked a massive commitment form the audience. If you watch a pilot with no predetermined end date, what it’s essentially doing is proposing to you on the first date, saying will you marry me for as long as I’m on. Will you stay tuned even if I frustrate you on occasion? And that’s a much bigger deal now in 2011 then it was in 2004, and I think we take some responsibility for the fact that…there are a number of people who watched the show when it started versus when it ended. We lost millions of viewers along the way for various reasons, but those millions that we lost became very jaded and discontent and sort of pledged never to go out on any more dates. So, they’re very vocal…when you see other shows, like The Event, that came along after LOST that were branded in any way as LOST-like, just saying, “I’m not going to allow myself to get suckered again.” Or, “I just can’t emotionally invest in a show other than LOST,” on a more positive spectrum.

On the creative side, I know you used to write a comic book miniseries. Would you ever go back to that?

I really loved writing that comic…and then I wrote a very short story for Action 900 this year; a Superman story. The problem with writing comics is I’m super, super slow. And I have such a tremendous amount of respect for comic book writers and artists just in terms of, a comic book issue is 22 pages, and in those 22 pages are 100 panels and essentially every panel you have to describe what’s happening and what people are saying. And there was also the idea that I was doing this completely solo as opposed to collaborating, which is what I’m used to and what I’m much more comfortable with. I really like working with other people, so I’m not going to say that I’ll never do it again, but I do feel that the degree of writing for comic books is so high that it’ll probably be awhile before I go back to it again. Unless I can con someone into partnering with me and letting them do all the work.

You currently have numerous projects in the works, the Star Trek sequel and Prometheus being two of the most high profile. Is there a project you’re particularly amped about? Or one that you really can’t wait for the public to see?

It’s a little like asking your parents which child is their favorite. I do think that Prometheus and Trek 2 are such wildly different projects, tonally and everything else. I’m very excited to see both of them come to life. I’m living the dream. The idea that I get to work with Ridley Scott or JJ again is so great…to call those people my creative partners and have the level of involvement that I did in these creative franchises that made me want to do what I’m doing now. I used to write fan fiction when I was 13, 14 and now I’m getting paid to write fan fiction, and it’s getting made. It does not get any better, literally.

Is there a project, a sequel, a comic book, or anything in particular that you would love to take on one day, whether it’s something you want to remake or rewrite?

As great as it has been doing remixes of these classic movies, right now I’m really drawn to the idea of doing something a little more original. It never occurred to me to work on an Alien movie or a Star Trek movie until the phone rang and the person on the other end said, “What do you think about this?” And the level of enthusiasm that I felt in that moment kind of governed the next few years of my life in both those cases. So, to answer your question, there’s nothing really out there that I feel is dying to be remade. In fact, I sort of feel like it’s maybe time to move away from the safety of the remake and move into the slightly more terrifying territory of something more original. Because LOST was so satisfying for me…it’s much cooler for me to be able to do Inception and be like, “This is unlike anything you’ve ever seen before.” Or people will describe something as Inception and it’s impossible to describe Inception using the vernacular of any other movie. So, I feel like even the idea of ‘sure, I’d love to make a Batman movie, but am I going to be able to make a Batman movie better than Christopher Nolan did?’ Because at the end of the day, it’s Batman; his parents got killed and he puts on a suit and beats up bad guys. I’m sure Christopher Nolan found a way to remake it in a way that’s interesting to the audience, but there’s nothing out there that’s lying dormant that I’m like, “Oh my God, the world needs to be see this again, but with my spin on it.”

Do you think you’d ever return to television? Not necessarily in a sterilized drama capacity, but in any shape or form?

I definitely want to do TV again. And probably sooner rather than later. But I do feel like the real trick is going to be ‘what are people’s expectations going to be for someone who was behind a show like LOST?’ So that it’s consistent with that idea of ‘I liked LOST, so technically speaking, I should like this other show,’ I’m going to do a show that’s entirely different from LOST, but at the same time, it has to be different enough to justify its own existence. The worst thing I could possibly do to the audience is try to generate my own LOST clone. So, its kind of gotta feel like it has the same genetic make-up of the first show, but standing next to LOST, you wouldn’t be able to tell that they were brothers. And that’s been a real challenge for me in terms of figuring out exactly how to render that idea. I want to create a show that is gong to be polarizing not just for the sake of being polarizing, but it requires a certain degree of risk-taking. So, kind of getting outside my own comfort zone again is a huge part of the creative process.

It was an unparalleled delight to speak with Lindelof, someone I already consider to be within the ranks of those he admires. Given his sold-out panel and the fan reception following the hour, it's clear that I’m among many who will continually support the future endeavors of one the business’s most insightful individuals.

Interview With Damon Lindelof - Reflections On LOST's 7 Year Anniversary & Future Projects

On Tuesday afternoon, the east coast suffered an earthquake. While earthquakes are usually caused by the shifting of the tectonic plates that make up the surface of the earth, some (me) have already begun to suspect that there might have been other causes for this earthquake. Television-related causes.

After all, on many small-screen shows, the ground seems to shake almost daily. With the frequency of tremors on television, it seems likely that at least one of these explanations actually caused the August 23 earthquake. Here are a few of our hypotheses.

#5: Peter Petrelli Goes Nuclear... Again

As seen on: Heroes

Why It's Plausible: The season one finale of Heroes saw Peter lose control of his nuclear abilities and almost destroy New York City, until he was flown up into the sky by his brother Nathan to safely detonate. That surprisingly killed neither Peter or Nathan (nor did it leave any nuclear fallout raining all over NYC), meaning that Peter could plausibly detonate again. Now that his brother Nathan has been killed by Sylar, it doesn't seem too likely that Peter would be able to get off the ground. His only hope would be to use the superheroic ability to walk into walls to walk into the ground, where he would be able to explode amongst the tectonic plates, causing, you guessed it, an earthquake.

Why It Isn't: Heroes was cancelled last year. With its flagging ratings and vapid storyline (toward the end, at least), this show wasn't powerful enough to cause any sort of major movement.

Verdict: Not the cause.

#4: Our Universes Are Breaking Down

As seen on: Fringe

Why It's Plausible: You know what happens when things start to go haywire between this universe and the other ones. Things start to look particularly rapturesque whenever Walternate tries to manipulate his machine into destroying this universe. There are major lightning storms, vortices wipe out entire flocks of sheep, and things just get downright scary. An earthquake might just be one of those symptoms of impending universal breakdown.

Why It Isn't: The earthquake didn't happen at 6:02 A.M. EST, the widely known time that Walternate activated the machine. This is pretty damning for this hypothesis's case.

Verdict: Wrong timing to be the cause.

#3: Jack Bauer Doing Something

As seen on: 24

Why It's Plausible: How many explosions were on 24 during its eight seasons? Scientists estimate that number is somewhere in the millions. Jack Bauer was present for a lot of them, or at least nearby. It seems like it would be a scientific anomaly if any sort of tectonic movement was not the work of Jack Bauer, or at least related vaguely to Jack Bauer's activities.

Why It Isn't: In the 24 universe, nobody really notices these explosions. Take, for instance, the fourth episode of the show's sixth season, when a suitcase nuke went off in Los Angeles. Thousands died, but by the end of the day, everyone at least seemed to forget about it.

Verdict: Possibly the cause, though strangely people are noticing.

#2: The Silurians Are Restless

As seen on: Doctor Who

Why It's Plausible: Last year in the Doctor Who serial "The Hungry Earth," we learned that there are entire civilizations of Silurians under the surface of the earth. And whenever they get angry, they decide to come up to the surface and take their revenge. But what if they found a new way to take revenge? Using their massive underground catacombs to create earthquakes would certainly be one way to catch humanity's attention.

Why It Isn't: Most Silurians are still hibernating, to wake up in a thousand years. While there are some pretty resourceful Silurians who aren't hibernating, it doesn't seem likely that they could muster the force to shake the whole east coast.

Verdict: Maybe the cause, but would require some resourceful Silurians.

#1: The Island Moved

As seen on: LOST

Why It's Plausible: We've seen what happens when the Island moves. It goes globe-hopping so much that Eloise Hawking has to have a special machine just to predict where it's going to be. We know that Ben Linus wasn't the first to turn the frozen donkey wheel, and he probably wasn't the last. While Hurley's enjoying his reign as protector of the Island currently, somebody might have gotten the big idea to give it a turn again, leaving it to land off the east coast and create the shockwaves that we all felt on Tuesday.

And will you look at the date of the earthquake? It's August 23 -- 8/23. Irrefutable evidence. Believe me now?

Why It Isn't: I can't think of any.

Verdict: Without a shadow of a doubt the cause.

Tuesday's Earthquake Explained by TV Shows

Get LOST at Comic-Con 2011!

Orientation: A Nerd Newbie Guide to #SDCC

Still missing LOST?  Still have questions?  Complaints?  Praise?  Join Jon "DocArzt" Lachonis and Jo "Jopinionated" Garfein as we discuss LOST live.  Right here.  Right now.

LOST Series Finale First Anniversary Live Chat

For a long time the TV actor was the star of the show but thanks to a more interactive landscape of the internet and most recently Twitter, the real star of a show can often be the person who created it and calls the shots behind the scenes. This person/persons are known as the showrunner and now there is a documentary being made about a number of showrunners across the US television landscape.

Directed by Irish filmmaker Des Doyle, the documentary has the simple and effective title Showrunners and a trailer has been released that shows some of the famous TV faces involved. From actors to TV network executives the film looks like it will explore the relationships between showrunners and the audience as well as the way they work with other people in the TV industry. Some of the showrunners featured in this trailer are Damon Lindelof (Lost), David Shore (House), Jeff Pinkner and J.H. Wyman (Fringe), Kurt Sutter (Sons of Anarchy), Mike Royce (Men of a Certain Age) and David Eick (Battlestar Galactica: Blood and Chrome) showing a range of genre and a variety of fanbases. As the film is still being made expect to see other favourite faces turning up in the film.

The role of the showrunner is something that I am particularly interested in, it was what I wrote my Masters thesis on (I looked at J.J. Abrams and authorship in television) and so I await this film with much anticipation. Since then there now seems to be an even bigger role publicly for the showrunner in this new age of broadcasting, that has an increased interactive element to it thanks to the ever expanding world of Twitter.

In rather good timing in regards to this trailer being released, New York magazine's TV issue hits newsstands today and includes an article by Emily Nussbaum that discusses the interactive role that a showrunner now has. Nussbaum looks at the genealogy of this term showrunner, which came about whilst creator heavy shows such as The Sopranos and Buffy the Vampire Slayer were airing; creators David Chase and Joss Whedon ushered in new era of fan worship. Nussbaum states that with showrunners like these "when you watch their shows, you know who set their stamp on it."

A large part of this special TV issue has showrunners such as Dan Harmon (Community), Michelle and Robert King (The Good Wife), Kurt Sutter (Sons of Anarchy), Shonda Rhimes (Grey's Anatomy), Vince Gilligan (Breaking Bad) and Jason Katims (Parenthood) discussing influences, whether they favour Twitter or not, shows they wished they had created, what they would change about Network TV and more. For fans of TV this issues is a must and includes features and interviews about the state of TV today, showcasing not just the creators of TV shows but also the talent in front of the camera such as cover star Amy Poehler.

What both this documentary and this special issue of New York magazine reveals, is that there is a continuing interest in not just the actors of a show or even the show it self, but with the people behind the camera of these programmes that are ambitious and loved by a very passionate audience.

Are you interested in the world of a showrunner? What do you think of the trailer for the documentary? Any showrunners you would like to see featured in the film?

For more on Showrunners check out their Facebook and Twitter pages for updates.

Showrunners Trailer from Showrunners Documentary on Vimeo.

Showrunners Become the Star in a New Feature Length Documentary

Tonight is the season 2 finale of The Vampire Diaries and what better way to celebrate it (and commiserate the super long summer hiatus) than to look at the relationship between the Salvatore brothers and other fraternal relationships that have featured both physical and emotional conflict.

As we go in to tonight's finale of The Vampire Diaries it looks like Stefan (Paul Wesley) and Damon Salvatore (Ian Somerhalder) will have to put aside their differences and recent confrontations to try and find a cure for the deadly wolf bite that Damon received in "The Last Day". Stefan's reaction to the news that his brother was likely to die was one of anguish, despite the fact that Damon had only recently shoved a giant stake in Stefan's gut and is openly in love with his girlfriend Elena (Nina Dobrev). When it comes down to it he will do anything to save his brother even after all the bad stuff they have done to each other. Stefan also still feels an enormous amount of guilt in his role of seeing that Damon completed his transition back in 1864 in becoming a vampire. It is this event that has led to the bitter rivalry for the past 150 years as well as being in love with the same woman on two separate occasions. One minute Stefan and Damon will be fighting, the next helping each other, either to help Elena or to save each other and if one thing is for certain the only person killing Stefan or Damon is the other brother and they will stop any one else who tries to do it to the other.

This slideshow looks at brothers on TV who have had their fair share of conflicts, some have injured each other, some have merely fought through words and non violent actions, and in the most extreme cases one brother has killed the other. What they do have in common is that there is a bond between brothers that produces compelling television particularly when there is conflict in these relationships. The brothers that I have chosen come from drama, comedy and sci-fi and offer a spectrum of different warring behaviour, but are there any warring brothers on TV that we might have missed? Let us know in the comments below.

Also for more on tonight's finale of The Vampire Diaries check out the promo pictures here, the promo video here and a sneak peak here. Be sure to join us tomorrow where we will be reacting to "As I Lay Dying".

Damon (Ian Somerhalder) and Stefan Salvatore (Paul Wesley), The Vampire Diaries

◄ Back

Next ►

Picture 1 of 12

Hating each other since 1864, stopping every so often to save the others' lives

From The Vampire Diaries to The O.C.: Warring Brothers on TV

Even though Mother’s Day is celebrated on different days throughout the world, tomorrow is that big day for a lot of countries. The modern Mother's Day is celebrated most commonly in March, April, or May as a day to honor mothers and motherhood.

In honor of this special occasion, I have put together a list of some of the best moms that have ever graced ours televisions now and as we were all growing up.

Television moms are usually loved in the sense that you would love that your own mother had some traits of your favorite character on TV. I admit that the most kickass mom in existence is my own mother for numerous reasons, but I am a little biased about this. When it comes to TV, there are several characters that, as I was a kid or a teenager (even now, really) I truly wished existed in real life. Those kinds of moms that you really just wanted to get some advice from or be comforted by or just plain hug them and feel better.

The moms that made this list aren’t exactly what we can call perfect mothers. They are flawed, they make mistakes, they can be ruthless, they can be caring, but above all, they love their children with everything they have. While that doesn’t make them perfect – and really, I don’t think any TV fan likes a perfect character – it makes them real and that’s what makes us love them so much. They screw up, they yell at their kids, they work too much, but deep down, we can always recognize our own mothers in those characters, which just connects us with them even more.

So to honor those fantastic characters and our own moms, I present to you the best TV mothers.

Happy Mother’s Day!

Lorelai Gilmore - Gilmore Girls

◄ Back

Next ►

Picture 1 of 15

Slideshow: The Best TV Moms

One of Community's defining episodes last season was it's paintball themed affair "Modern Warfare". This year they look set to blow that out of the water with double the length in this two part season finale that once again sees Greendale Community College partaking in a game of paintball. Not only is it a two part finale with the first part airing tonight on NBC, but they have a very special guest star appearing- Josh Holloway who this time last year was finishing up his role as Sawyer on Lost.

Tonight's half of the finale has the Sergio Leone inspired title "A Fist Full of Paintballs" and from the costuming it is clear that there is a western theme to this years paintball game. In "Modern Warefare" there was a definite apocalyptic vibe to the game and set up, the Dean (Jim Rash) this year looks like he is attempting to keep the whole thing under control and we all know how much he loves a good costume. Unfortunately for the Dean he is not all that great at doing this so as you can imagine the game spirals out of control once again and it looks like the school is going to get trashed (again).

So how does Holloway fit in to all of this? He will play the mysterious and serious paintballer Black Rider who will cause problems with the group, particularly Jeff who has often shown that he doesn't act well when there is the threat of another powerful male. Showrunner Dan Harmon told Entertainment Weekly about the role of Black Rider that:

“He’s badass. He’s from somewhere else so he’s not your typical Greendale screwball. He’s definitely got his stuff together, and he knows how to shoot a gun and he’s got the right equipment. He’s a formidable, shadowy threat. He seems to out-Winger Winger a little bit…. [Black Rider] and Jeff [Winger, played by Joel McHale] onscreen together is pretty funny — you can definitely see the overlap that two flint rocks have — that creates friction and it’s classic stuff. Having another fellow with such looks in the story certainly brings out the worst in Jeff.”

As any fan of Lost can confirm, Holloway certainly has charm that works wonders with the ladies (and probably the guys too), Sawyer was definitely a hit with the opposite sex and it looks like he will be bringing this charm to Black Rider in Community. This will certainly rile Jeff, who despite his pretence of not caring, being the guy in the group who is the one with sexual prowess is definitely important to him. As the sneak peak shows below there is definitely a chemistry between Black Rider and Annie (Alison Brie) which I'm sure will lead to a reaction from Jeff.

This season of Community has been strong, improving on it's stellar freshman year by taking risks which has produced some fine episodes of comedy and going beyond that. This finale looks set to continue this epic season and the inclusion of a Lost favourite makes this a highly anticipated episode.

Here are both the promo and a sneak peak at tonight's episode.

Tonight on Community: Paintball and Josh Holloway

It seems Evangeline Lilly learned a thing or two about keeping secrets from her days on Lost because, as US Weekly reveals today, she has somehow managed to keep her rather pregnant self secret from the papparazzi until now.  Lilly was photographed outside her home in Hawaii Thursday, and though her publicist had no comment, the pictures certainly seem to show her well into her pregnancy.  It is assumed the father is long-time boyfriend, and former Lost crew member Norman Kali.  Previously, she dated co-star Dominic Monaghan who, of course, played Charlie on the mega-hit series.

Lilly has taken a break from the acting world (save a few commercials for L'Oreal) since her run on Lost ended last May.  She told US, "I'm definitely planning on taking a break for a little while.  I consider acting a day job -- it's not my dream; it's not my be-all, end-all."

Personally, I hope that once she takes some time to enjoy the birth of what will surely be a beautiful child, she will return to the small screen.  I know some people felt to the contrary, but I always thought she gave a great performance of perhaps the most difficult character on Lost.  She has the rare combination of being beautiful, but credibly tough and rugged.  Some enterprising writer out there should be able to craft a role perfect for the soon-to-be mom.

So, congratulations to Ms. Lilly and Mr. Kali!  What do you think about this news?  Any baby name suggestions?  Would Charlie or Aaron be too obvious?  How about Damon or Carlton?  Please leave your comments below, and be sure to check TVOvermind for all of your TV news needs.

Follow: twitter.com/tvovermind
Follow: twitter.com/MikeNJD
Email: michael@tvovermind.com

Lost's Evangeline Lilly is Pregnant!

The final episode of Oprah is upon us and like most other big finales and television events, the cost of advertising during this occasion is likely to send some advertisers to the bank to get their products featured to a wide audience. Whilst The Oprah Winfrey Show is not going to get the kind of audience that watches the Superbowl or the Oscars there will still be a significantly larger than usual audience watching this last broadcast. This means that asking for inflated advertising prices is not unexpected though the amount of $1 million per 30 second spot seems a little staggering considering it is a day time program.

How does this compare to other finales with big audiences? Here are a few examples:

Friends (2004): $2 million

Seinfeld (1998): $1.42 million

Everybody Loves Raymond (2005): $1.22 million

Lost (2010): $900,000

24 (2010): $650,00

The Seinfeld finale was watched in 76.3 million households and the Friends finale was viewed in an equally impressive 52.5 million households, making the figures charged for an ad spots during these shows seem worth it. Unfortunately these kinds of numbers for a TV program that isn't a sporting event or an awards show like the Oscars are more than unlikely in the TV landscape of today. With finales they tend to have more commercial breaks, the Lost finale last year showed a staggering 107 spots which ran for about 45 minutes of air time, showing that these TV events really mean big business (though the only ads I remember from that occasion are the Lost themed Target ones) even if the audience is not as big as it once was.

In the age of the DVR when people can just skip the commercials it could be considered an outlandish asking price for a day time ad spot, however if the ads are tailored to this event that might prevent people from skipping them and making it a wise investment.

Will you be watching on May 25th? What do you think of this $1 million price tag?

$1 Million For a 30 Second Spot on the Final Oprah Winfrey Show

No less than literary icon George R. R. Martin has reignited the debate over LOST's controversial ending. Martin made the comment that when it comes to ending his Game of Thrones series he doesn't want to, quote, "do a LOST." Ouch. LOST co-creator Damon Lindelof responded with a volley of strikes from his Twitter account that did everything from insulting the length between volumes in the Game of Thrones series, to ridiculing the oddly lavender design of Martin's less than cutting edge website. Declaring the situation a 'feud' Lindelof took exception to the idea of LOST's ending becoming the symbol for all things f'd up.

The initial burst of tweets were obviously from the heart, but when Lindelof was approached by EW to discuss the matter further his media training kicked in, and it wasn't long before the LOST show-runner was lavishing Martin with praise, and offering a more cool-headed perspective on his earlier blowup. "When he uses phrases like '[messing] up the ending' or 'I felt like someone dropped a turd on my doorstep,' you know: Look, 'Lost' is my baby, and you don't put baby in a corner. I feel duty-bound, just for my own sense of integrity, to respond publicly."

Without judging the man, it is obvious that Damon Lindelof is the kind of guy who is very reactive - perhaps to his own peril. Many creators handle public criticism in a very pragmatic way: it's a guarantee that some people will hate your work. If you are a writer, painter, musician, or even a blogger, preparing to show your work for public consumption you must be at peace with the idea that there are going to be people who will love it, like it, tolerate it grudgingly, or absolutely loathe it.

George Lucas is perhaps the best example of a heartfelt creator who gets it right. Long before Lucas was nearly crucified for Jar Jar Binks, Star Wars fans were prepared to lynch him for 'muppeting-up' Return of the Jedi. His commercial and creative decisions have made Lucas a divisive figure in the immense franchise he, himself, created. For all of this, though, Lucas exhibits a zen-like perspective of his critics. After Jon Stewart skewered Lucas on air about several plot-holes in the Star Wars series in a 2010 interview, the talk show host specifically addressed the love-hate relationship he endures amongst fans, to which the director answered, calmly, "life is duality." Pressing Lucas further, Stewart asked Lucas if he felt he needed to answer his critics. Lucas replied "It's a work of fiction, it's a metaphor, it's not real, and therefore you can either like it, or not like it. Whatever."

BIG FAT CORRECTION

In an earlier version of this, I used a quote from the LA Times Blog that referenced Lindelof as saying that he and Carlton felt the finale of LOST was empirically brilliant - a statement I figured was a bit too self assured.  As it turns out, the quote came from EW and was not used in the proper context at the LA Times.  Damon was referring to his reaction to The Sapranos finale and how both he and Carlton thought IT was brilliant, and were worried after the fandom responded negatively.  LA Times, and myself, both attributed those statements to Damon's opinion on the LOST finale. This is NOT correct. SORRY! Your turn, LA Times.

George R.R. Martin Vs. Damon Lindelof - Really?

Forbes put together their annual report of the biggest moneymakers in TV, and it shouldn't surprise anyone that American Idol led the way, making $7.1 million every half hour in 2010. The number is down 12 percent from the previous year.

Two and a Half Men placed a very distant second, raking in $2.89 million for CBS.

Below are the top ten:
1. American Idol (FOX) $7.1 million
2. Two and a Half Men (CBS) $2.89 million
3. Desperate Housewives (ABC) $2.74 million
4. Grey’s Anatomy (ABC) $2.67 million
5. Dancing With the Stars (ABC) $2.67 million
6. Lost (ABC) $2.60 million
7. The Big Bang Theory (CBS) $2.50 million
8. 24 (FOX) $2.45 million
9. Private Practice (ABC) $2.32 million
10. Mike & Molly (CBS) $2.11 million

By network, ABC makes up half of the top ten, while CBS contributes 3 shows and FOX a pair. NBC is noticably absent.

The report adds that Glee (FOX) brought in $2 million per half hour, good for 11^th place and Modern Family (ABC) earned $1.6 million, which would put it at number 16.

How does Forbes put this report together? They explain:
"To determine which series generated the most advertising revenue in 2010, we turned to the data crunchers at Kantar Media who track ad spending among other metrics. The firm surveyed all regularly scheduled prime-time shows, excluding sports events, for our fourth annual version of the list. For an apples-to-apples comparison of network programs of differing lengths, the series are ranked based on ad revenue per average 30 minutes.

To be sure, the revenue figures provided are estimates. The amount individual buyers actually forked over for their collection of 30-second spots varies, depending on advertisers’ perceptions about a show’s value to their clout with the respective network. What’s more, this list doesn’t factor in the millions spent to produce and license these shows."

Which Television Shows Were the Biggest Moneymakers in 2010?

LOST star Matthew Fox seemed determined not to take on another role in a long-running television show after the ABC drama ended its six year run, but that doesn't mean he's out of the acting game.  I recently read that he's starring in a play and now Deadline reports that he's been cast as the villain in a new movie.

I think it's safe to say, thus far, that Fox has had more success on the small screen than the big screen.  Two of his most recent movies - Vantage Point and Speed Racer - weren't exactly hits.  But that could change now that he's joining the reboot of the movies centered around James Patterson's character Alex Cross.  Cross has been the main character in two previous movies: Kiss the Girls and Along Came a Spider.  Morgan Freeman previously played the character and I thought Kiss the Girls was a great movie.

Now Tyler Perry is stepping into the title role in I, Alex Cross and Matthew Fox will take on the role of Michael Sullivan, a killer known as the Butcher of Sligo.  After Cross thwarts one of his crimes, Sullivan (spoiler if you haven't read the book!) kills Cross' wife (end spoiler).

This role will certainly be a departure from Fox's  role of hero, Jack Shephard, on LOST.  Ed Burns will also be starring in the movie as Cross' partner, Tommy Kane.  Deadline reports that the movie will contain a few twists that weren't in the original book.

clarissa @ tvovermind.com
twitter.com/clarissa373
twitter.com/tvovermind

LOST's Matthew Fox Cast in New Alex Cross Movie

LOST ended for good in May of last year. I know. I'm not in denial. I'm not angry. I'm not depressed. The five stages of grief have come and gone and I've accepted my new life without the show. Between the time it ended and now, I've watched all three seasons of Breaking Bad, re-watched all five seasons of The Wire, and started watching shows like Boardwalk Empire and The Walking Dead. All of which are absolutely fantastic. At least in terms of number of quality shows, there's never been a better time to be a television addict. And yet, no matter how hard I've tried, I haven't found a single season of any show as compelling as that first season of LOST. I don't believe in perfection, especially when talking about a work of art, so I can't say with any confidence that it was perfect. But it was pretty damn close.

What sets it apart from other seasons of LOST? For me, the main difference is that the characters were just as mysterious as the island itself. We didn't know these people. The writers did a terrific  job of slowly unraveling the mysteries behind our favorite castaways throughout the course of the entire season. Jack's relationship with his father. Kate on the run. Sawyer's letter. Locke's mystical transformation. Each story was so dynamic, so interesting, so captivating. I wanted to know about our characters just as badly as I wanted to know what the Black Rock was or what the thing in the jungle going tikka tikka tikka was doing. As the show went on past the first season, we spent more time with our characters, and naturally we weren't as intrigued with their back stories. LOST wasn't the only show to have great, mysterious characters in its first season, and it won't be the last. But the way they implemented their remarkable flashbacks, connected them to the island stories (and to other characters), and made us care deeply about them so quickly (we barely knew Locke in his first flashback "Walkabout" but it was still incredibly emotional) -- that is why it was so impressive.

And then of course, there was the survival. Finding food and water. The beach vs. caves debate. Exploring the island. The "A-Team" missions. Part of what made season one so awesome was that simple element of survival that became sort of obsolete once they found the hatch. Amidst the attacks and kidnapping by the Others (by the way, has there ever been a more ominous group of villains than them? "We're gonna have to take the boy" -- my god. I still get goosebumps. Okay, moving on), running away from that thing in the jungle, and trying to triangulate signals with one of Sayid's crazy thingamajigs, it's easy to forget that these people were surviving on the island. It was a survival show. After about season two or so it stopped becoming a survival show. That's no fault of the writers, as it was a natural progression of the events on the island, but I really miss that aspect from season one. Every seemingly mundane task the characters had was important. Everything mattered. It truly was either live together, or die alone.

Over the past eight months or so, hating on the ending of LOST has seemed like the popular thing to do (or at least, the squeaky wheel gets the oil). It's true, it wasn't perfect -- but it couldn't be. When's the last time you were completely, 100% happy and satisfied with the ending to an epic television series you had been following for close to a decade? They weren't going to please everyone. Even if you hated the ending, and you can't be convinced otherwise, don't let that ruin your experience of the series as a whole. Does a bad ending negate the magic of its first season? No, no it doesn't. In times like these, people like to be hyperbolic. They like to pretend that one ending that didn't go perfectly for them canceled out six years of incredible television. Season one was by no means LOST's only good season (in many ways, seasons two and three -- forgetting the whole thing about Jack's tattoos -- were just as good). But for me, it was its best season. It is a reminder of just how good LOST could be. How compelling it was. How much it meant to television. How much it meant to me.

There are moments like the raft launch in Exodus that will go down in the annals of television as one of the greatest moments ever. The acting. The music. The cinematography. Remember moments like those. Don't only remember what will just make you angry. In the words of Cormac McCarthy, "we forget the things we want to remember and remember the things we want to forget." But it doesn't have to be that way. A re-watch of season one will prove it to you.

LOST Season 1: A Look Back at What Made This Show Incredible

Jamie McCarthy - WireImage.com

Michael Emerson, more recently known better as Lost's Benjamin Linus, will be returning to television for the first time since leaving the island behind in May. EW had the exclusive story, which has Emerson playing a bug specialist with Asperger’s syndrome who is hired to entertain the children at Max's birthday party. This should be interesting not only to see Emerson play the intriguing role, but also because Max also has Asperger's syndrome. The episode will air in March.

EW's report is posted below in its entirety:

Michael Emerson, who made a name for himself as the manipulative, creepy Benjamin Linus on Lost, has lined up his next quirky TV role: EW has learned exclusively that he’ll guest star as a bug specialist on the NBC drama Parenthood. In the episode, which airs in March, Emerson plays Amazing Andy (of Amazing Andy’s Wonderful World of Bugs), a smart-yet-socially-awkward man who’s hired to entertain the children at a birthday party for Max (Max Burkholder). Like Max, the son of Kristina (Monica Potter) and Adam (Peter Krause), Andy has Asperger’s syndrome. Emerson also will star with former Lost castmate Terry O’Quinn in J.J. Abrams’ NBC drama pilot Odd Jobs.

Speaking of Odd Jobs, J.J. Abrams said earlier this week that a script is being written now and that the intent is to make a pilot for this season.

I think Emerson is one of the best actors around today and would watch him in anything, so I will certainly be tuning in to Parenthood in March to see his guest appearance. How about you?

Michael Emerson to Guest Star on Parenthood

J.J. Abrams has so much going on that it'd be difficult to fit the entire list into one 140-character tweet. Collider caught up with the busy Abrams and got his take on the current and future television shows he's involved with as well as the upcoming films Star Trek 2 and Super 8. Check it all out below.

His thoughts on the LOST finale and whether or not he had any input:
J.J. ABRAMS: Oh, my god, I thought those guys just did an incredible job. It was really beautifully done. No. I watched them do an amazing job without me, and I didn’t want to upset the balance. Seriously, they didn’t need my help. They did an amazing job.

How he feels about Fringe's move to Friday night:
ABRAMS: Oh, I’m horrified beyond belief, but as a fan of the genre and the show, I’m hoping that fans will tune in. I certainly can promise that it will be worth their while. The episodes that are coming up are spectacular. I guess you can just be hopeful and say that, if the work is good enough, it will find the audience. I think they’re doing better work now, even in the second half of Season 3, than they’ve ever done on the series. I’m just crossing my fingers that fans of the show, show up. I don’t see an upside because the audience on Friday nights is harder to find. But, that’s not to say that they aren’t there and that we might not be able to make it there. Certainly, I would be lying to you if I said I’m thrilled about the move. But, what I am thrilled about is that the network has been incredibly supportive and, despite its move to Friday, they’ve been nothing but encouraging of the show. It’s still on the air in its third season, and it’s not easy to do that. It’s not easy to get to Season 3 of anything. They’ve allowed the show to become truly great, I think. The question is, will audiences find a great show on Friday nights? I pray that they do.

On what he has in development for network television right now:
ABRAMS: We have a few projects. We have a show for Fox called Alcatraz, that starts shooting on the 19th, which I could not be more excited about. And, we have a show for CBS called Person of Interest, that Jonah Nolan wrote. We have Odd Jobs for NBC. And we have a new script called Pulp, that was written by Alison Schapker and Monica Breen. That’s a spectacular script. We’re about to go out with that.

The status of Odd Jobs, with Terry O’Quinn and Michael Emerson:
ABRAMS: A script is being written right now. The intent would be to make the pilot for this season.

Is Alcatraz actually about Alcatraz?
ABRAMS: Alcatraz does involve Alcatraz. Some will be [shot in the actual prison], yes. There are sets being built, but there will be some of the pilot shot in San Francisco at Alcatraz. I don’t want to give anything away because no one wants to hear that, but I will say that it’s a beautifully written and surprisingly emotional script, although not surprising when you know that Liz Sarnoff wrote it. She’s amazing. The show is about an incredibly odd and mysterious turn and secret about the prison of Alcatraz, and a modern-day mystery that involves something very odd that happened there 50 years ago. The cast is unbelievable. It’s Sam Neill, Sarah Jones, Jorge Garcia from Lost – who was the first person we cast and is just the greatest with an amazing role – and Johnny Coyne, who’s an amazing English actor. We have a spectacular cast. There are a number of other actors and it is wonderful. I’m really excited about the show.

His thoughts on what happened with Undercovers:
ABRAMS: I’ve got to say, I feel like it was unfortunate. Of course, I completely blame myself for the entire thing. The conceit of the show was to do a much more frivolous, fun show, but ultimately, I think it was just too frivolous and too simple, and we didn’t go deep enough. We were really desperately trying to stay away from mythology and complexity and intensity and too much serious, dark storytelling and, ultimately, that’s not necessarily what I do best. I think audiences felt that it was a little bit lacking. I see that and completely take responsibility for its failing. I especially feel for the actors, who are incredibly talented and wonderful. The directors we got, the editors and the crew was awesome. The idea that I would somehow squander really talented people’s time and take them and us away from our families and other work we have to do, it was a real heartbreaker. Again, I feel completely responsible. I would desperately hope that no one, including network executives, would see the failure of Undercovers as a reflection of the race of the cast. It obviously had absolutely zero to do with that. It was completely my responsibility and not anyone else’s. I don’t think anyone is going to think that. Instead of that, I think they would say, “Series that have a premise that’s too light and too disposable and too frivolous won’t work.” Audiences want more. They want something that is more emotionally true and resonates a little more. I think the true failing of the show was that it didn’t go deep enough and it wasn’t about enough. Everyone, including Josh Reims, with whom I created the show, followed my lead. It was all my doing.

Take a moment to digest all of that information, and when you're ready, here's what he had to say about two of his upcoming films.

When will audiences get to see a trailer for Super 8?
ABRAMS: Probably sometime in March, I think.

Do you have a date by which you have to decide whether you’re going to direct Star Trek 2?
ABRAMS: That’s a good question. I probably do. I don’t know. There’s a script that should be coming in, hopefully by the time there’s a trailer for Super 8, and then we’ll know.

What’s the biggest proponent of that decision for you?
ABRAMS: I guess the idea of not wanting to choose to direct a film, for which I’ve not read a script. It’s a tough decision to make without seeing any pages. That’s not to say that I don’t have all the faith in the world in the spectacular writers. Damon Lindelof, Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman are awesome. My hope is that they’ll write the script, it will be great and we can make a fun, exciting sequel to Star Trek.

twitter.com/souledout
twitter.com/tvovermind

J.J. Abrams Talks LOST Finale, Fringe, Alcatraz, Person of Interest, Odd Jobs and More

Don't think badly of me when I say that I first thought Dark Skies was going to be a cheap X-Files knockoff. After all, it is a genre show about aliens that premiered right in the middle of the X-Files' run. Look at it this way: it looked like a FlashForward to the X-Files' LOST. And to some extent, that's what it is. After all, it only lasted a season, featured a more initially focused concept, and gained a very devout cult following that tried its best to save the show. Sounds familiar, right?

Nineties children like myself will probably remember a book series called Animorphs by K.A. Applegate. I only drop that reference because it's perhaps the best comparison to the plot of Dark Skies. If you drop the animal-transformation gimmicks, you've got an extremely dark story of a covert alien invasion carried out by parasites who enter your head and take over. It's a less-camp Invasion of the Bodysnatchers arc.

The thing that separates Dark Skies from those two, though, is the conspiracy angle. What angle, you ask? Oh, how about the JFK-was-assassinated-by-the-aliens-because-he-found-out-about-their-plan-and-Jack-Ruby-was-possessed-by-an-alien-to-kill-Oswald angle? Or the aliens-trying-to-place-sublimenal-messages-in-a-Beatles-broadcast-triggered-by-"Can't-Buy-Me-Love" angle? (Or the I'm-obnoxiously-using-too-many-hyphens angle.)

Does that sound just crazy enough to be good? Because it is. Dark Skies is what it would be like if The X-Files had a lovechild with Mad Men. Now, sometimes the historical impersonations just aren't right on. The John Lennon impersonator in the fourth episode isn't bad, but the rest of the band doesn't even look like they're trying to resemble the Fab Four (George Harrison was nowhere near that chubby, folks). And sometimes it seems as though the writers looked at brief descriptions of famous characters from the 1960's and thought, "How can we throw in aliens to explain that interesting character trait?"

But aside from those hiccups and a really tiresome pace, Dark Skies is a surprising amount of fun. Thanks to Shout! Factory, the entire series will be released on DVD for the first time, after a lengthy fight on the part of the fans. The six-disc set is worth the money, too.

It comes with a little booklet with a lengthy introduction by series co-creator Bryce Zabel, which is the appetizer for the meat-and-potatoes six disc set, which is nicely fitted together into three thinpak cases. As for the special features, the set is teeming with them. Commentaries, recut episodes, the list goes on and on. There's even a three-part retrospective on the series featuring Zabel, co-creator Brent V. Friedman, and stars Eric Close and Megan Ward. The set even includes promos for the show used on NBC during the show's original run. And though the eighteenth and final episode has a mildly satisfying conclusion, the blueprints for a never-made second season are included in the set as well. When I sit "teeming," I meant it. It's a worthy set to get for any genre fan. LOST, Fringe, The X-Files, FlashForward - if you liked any of those shows, chances are you'll like Dark Skies.

You can order the set on Amazon for just $22.99.

DVD Review - Dark Skies: The Declassified Complete Series

Don't know what's going on? Click here.

...And we're back with the second day of the TVOvermind Awards. As the voting for yesterday's awards is finishing up, it's time to get started with round 1.2 of the awards, which will determine the best shows on network television. That's right, we'll be covering ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, and the CW in the polls today. First up is the "Alphabet Network."

Vote below, and ensure your show has a spot in the next round of the awards by spreading the word! The winner of this poll will compete on Day 3 for the "Best Show on Network TV" award. Stay posted today, though, for more chances to pick your network television favorites!

This poll will close at 2:15 EST on December 31, 2010.

[poll id="16"]

TVO Awards - Day 2 - Best Show of 2010, Round 1.2 - Best Show on ABC

Ten is a round, perfect and predictable number. In the spirit of Spinal Tap, this list goes to eleven. Here are my selections for the best of the small screen in 2010:

1. Lost

Favorite episode of season 6: “What They Died For”

Those who absolutely loved the series finale will defend it forever, and those who loathed it will argue with the same fervor. After watching the final episode several times, I strongly feel as though Damon, Carlton & co. gifted their dedicated fans with a finale that exceeded expectations and will continue to inspire many of us for the rest of our lives. The flash sideways memory revelations (Jin & Sun and Juliet & Sawyer in particular), the long overdue father & son Shephard reunion and those last ten minutes in the church were extremely satisfying on every level.

2. Breaking Bad

Favorite episode of season 3: “Fly”

The ability to create and sustain nail-biting intensity throughout each episode is rare, and Breaking Bad consistently achieves that accomplishment every season. Coupled with the powerful presence and performances of Bryan Cranston and Aaron Paul, this is a show filled with jaw-dropping moments that deserves a much wider audience. Anna Gunn had an outstanding season as well, and really is one of the more underrated actresses on television.

3. Fringe

Favorite episode of season 3: “Entrada”

Fringe has certainly upped the stakes and ante this year with a very compelling first half of an amazing third season. From the stunning visual presentation of the alternate universe to Anna Torv’s Emmy-worthy double duty, Fringe has inched up my list and is fast approaching favorite current show status.

4. The Good Wife

Favorite episode of season 2: “Poisoned Pill”

Featuring one of the most talented (and, arguably, most attractive) ensembles on television, The Good Wife is anything but a weekly procedural. Every episode is a pleasant surprise, an hour chock full of sexually charged dalliances and intriguing legal cases. Archie Panjabi’s Kalinda is easily the most interesting, frustrating and mysterious character, male or female, to grace the current television landscape.

5. Terriers

Favorite episode of season 1: “Sins of the Past”

Disappointed doesn’t even begin to describe how I feel about the cancellation of this stellar series. Ted Griffin and Shawn Ryan created a unique and quirky show about two friends who unofficially investigate local crimes in San Diego, and established immediate emotional resonance with both characters from the very first episode. Terriers had heart, and FX broke ours when they had to cancel the series due to low ratings.

6. Community

Favorite episode of season 2: “Abed’s Uncontrollable Christmas”

Aside from Lost, this was the only show that required multiple viewings in order to pick up integral background conversations and character interactions that took place in the blink of an eye. I am blissfully in love with Community’s pop culture references and homages (both the obscure and the obvious), as well as the off-kilter cast of characters who make me feel as though I am a welcome guest at their study hall table every week.

7. Modern Family

Favorite episode of season 2: “Unplugged”

The very best scenes may as well be titled Those Dizzy Dunphys and The Crazy Cam & Mitch Mockumentary.  Modern Family is an incredibly well scripted series that continuously pushes the envelope, resulting in more laugh-out-loud moments than any other comedy on my very crowded DVR.

8. Mad Men

Favorite episode of season 4: “The Suitcase”

Although the focus of show is always going to be Don Draper, this was Peggy’s season. Elisabeth Moss was nothing short of phenomenal in every episode, and truly had the opportunity to shine while January Jones was oddly relegated to occasional appearances.

9. Friday Night Lights

Favorite episode of season 4: “The Son”

Coach and Tami Taylor are candidates for the most realistic and likable parents on television. It is admirable that the true spotlight on the show still illuminates their relationship, above and beyond all football and high school drama. This season, the heartbreaking and the heartwarming were intermingled brilliantly, especially when Riggins and Saracen were involved.

10. Damages

Favorite episode of season 3: “The Next One’s Gonna Go in Your Throat”

The web that ensnares Patty, Ellen and their associates continues to be a deliciously taut and tangled mess. I enjoyed attempting to put together the pieces to the 13-episode puzzle that they dangled from that web, and this season was just as enigmatic as the first two. Thank goodness Ted Danson is also on Bored to Death, because he continues to steal every scene when he appears (far too infrequently) on Damages as Frobisher.

11. Dexter

Favorite episode of season 5: “Everything is Illumenated”

In previous years, Dexter was featured much higher up on my list. While many were dissatisfied with this season, I found the show and Michael C. Hall to be quite riveting. Julia Stiles was the perfect addition to the cast and a welcome change of scenery in Dexter’s life.  I continue to be baffled by the lack of nominations for Jennifer Carpenter; there is simply no other actress or female character like Debra Morgan on television, and she definitely deserves the recognition.

What are your top shows and favorite episodes from 2010?

{Follow Jo on Twitter @jopinionated}

This List Goes to 11: The Top Shows & Episodes of 2010

LOST has had a deep, lasting impact on my literary palette. Philip K. Dick is one of my all-time favorite authors. Slaughterhouse-Five is one of my favorite books. I've read The Third Policeman, started Y: The Last Man, and voraciously consumed every Stephen King I could get my hands on. I chose for a school research paper to be on philosopher Soren Kirekegaard after seeing his Fear and Trembling featured in the show's sixth season.

But the literary references on LOST weren't only important because they introduced viewers to new authors and works. They were important because they expanded the deeper meanings and metaphor of the show, meaning that fans would be consuming page after page in relation to LOST long after the show had ended its run. Pretty genius, actually. But how did all the pieces fit together? Luckily, there's now a book that pieces that all together. I'm talking about Sarah Clarke Stuart's Literary LOST: Viewing Television Through the Lens of Literature.

You might have heard of Stuart. She's taught not one but four classes based on LOST at the University of North Florida and other various institutions, which got her a little publicity around the fan community not too long ago. Now, she's a staff member here at TVOvermind, though don't think her presence here is influencing my review when I tell you that this book is a must-have for any LOST fan. I'm serious. It's more in-depth than Lostpedia.

The book has a thematic format, which makes it slightly difficult to follow. For instance, VALIS by Philip K. Dick is discussed in both chapters 2 ("Faith, Sacrifice, and Redemption"), and 6 ("Dreams, Illusions, and the Nature of Reality"). An encyclopedia this ain't, but engrossing it is.

I found myself scratching my head while reading this book about connections I should have made but didn't. And, if you've been influenced by LOST's literascape as much as I have, then it'll simply make you happy to see your favorite books critically dissected as though for the absolute coolest class in the world.

The book is also packed with fun little quotes from both the show and the works mentioned in the book: chapter 4, which deals with time travel, features Ben Linus's "time travelling bunnies" quote, for example.

The most fun in the book, though, comes from the parallelisms that Stuart is able to draw between characters of the text and characters of LOST. There's a section titled "Kierkegaard, Abraham, and Benjamin Linus," which compares and contrasts the philosopher, religious figure, and bug-eyed bastard, based upon their faith. The book is slowly pulling you in, isn't it? I've been poring over this book for weeks, and I'm still able to find incredibly fascinating stuff that interests me, even if it's my third time reading that page.

Literary LOST is for every LOST fans, even those who didn't like the show's ending. The show's not over yet, folks, not in our minds, at least. LIterary LOST will help to unlock some of those answers to questions you didn't even know you had.

The book won't be released until January 15, but if you want to secure your copy, head on over to Amazon and order a copy for just $13.46.

Book Review - Literary Lost: Viewing Television Through the Lens of Literature

This is how you do television.

Before I break the scene down, watch it in full. Watch it as you'd watch any other. Don't think too hard, just try to let yourself go and enjoy it. For those who have seen Breaking Bad, you'll probably have one of those "ohhhh, THIS one" moments as soon as you see the video embedded below. It's one of those scenes that you remember for a long, long time. If you haven't already seen the show, I sincerely hope that this convinces you to do so.

Without further adieu, here it is.

Now, let's get to it.

1) The music - The song played in this scene is "DLZ" by TV on the Radio. It's a pretty funky, unique song that probably wouldn't fit most other scenes, but it's perfect in this context. When I listen to this song, I feel like I'm a lot cooler than I really am. It gives me that feeling of bravado, that sensation of raw toughness and grit and of unyielding spirit and determination. I feel invincible. This is why it's so perfect for this scene. Those are the exact emotions that Walt is experiencing in this moment. He's starting to truly believe this role he has created for himself. The music is therefore a direct auditory manifestation of the character. What he's feeling -- you're hearing. I can think of no better use of soundtrack than when it enhances the emotions of the characters without distracting from them. Damon Lindelof, co-creator and showrunner of LOST, once mentioned that bad music will tell you how to feel, and good music will take what you're already feeling and enhance it (excuse my paraphrasing, Damon). I think that, despite the song clearly not being an original composition made for the show, Lindelof's assertion rings true in this case. It really does amplify the emotions of the scene. Not only can we feel the birth of "Heisenberg" through what we're experiencing visually, but we can also feel it through the music. And that's important.

2) The genius of Bryan Cranston - There are currently two actors on television who have mastered the art of "The Look." The first is Terry O'Quinn. The other, is Bryan Cranston. It goes without saying that Cranston is a tremendous actor, fully deserving of the countless accolades he's been given over the past few years. His acting in this scene is magnificent. Given that, I'm choosing to focus solely on "The Look." Well, technically, there are two separate "Looks" -- but I'll get to that in a second. The first is at 0:47. Cranston cocks his head roughly an inch or two to the left, and suddenly he has become a different person. All it takes is an extremely subtle head movement to go from innocent chemistry teacher Mr. White to the menacing drug kingpin Heisenberg. From then on, his head doesn't move. Save for a calm, calculated blink, Cranston's face is locked in staring down his foe. The second "Look" and probably the more infamous of the two is Cranston's hint of a smile at 1:26. The phrase "hint of a smile" gets tossed around often, but in this case there are no better words to describe Cranston's expression. It is definitely not a smile in the normal sense -- it's literally a hint. A clue. A suggestion of a smile. In fact, it's debatable whether or not he's smiling at all depending on your interpretation of the scene. That is why what Cranston does is so magical. I tried to sort this out in my head, but I'm still not sure how the heck Cranston managed to suggest so much with such a minute gesture. It's remarkable. My interpretation of the "Look" is that he is smiling -- he is starting to accept the man he has become and...he kind of likes it. But as soon as the smile comes, it's gone. It morphs into a stern look of defiance, and we cut to black as the music spills over into the credits. Simply amazing.

3) The camerawork - We start with a long shot of Walt walking out of the hardware store and toward the camera. We don't cut. Suddenly, he stops right in front of us. He's acquired his target. After a brief glimpse of two men in the distance we're back tracking Walt -- this time with a close-up of his deathly stare. He gets to the RV and after a couple of quick cuts, the exchange.

"Stay out of my territory."

As Walt coolly says this awesome line, we stay fixed on his stare. We don't cut to see the other man's reaction to Walt's demand as you'd might expect us to. We don't need to. His scurrying back to the RV tells us all we need to know. Then, we slowly move back toward Walt. One final shot of the van leaving in defeat and then we're back on Walt until the credits roll. I don't have a whole lot of filmmaking experience so I hope you'll excuse the rather simple analysis of the scene's cinematography, but I don't think you need to have experience with a camera to acknowledge how brilliant it is in this scene. It focuses on Walt when it needs to. It creates tension when it needs to. It breaks that tension when it needs to. The camerawork reflects Walt's feelings just as the music does. We can feel his determination when we watch him walk out of the store without cutting away. Usually I can find spots where I think they should have kept a shot longer or cut sooner, but not in this scene. This scene is shot perfectly.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how you make television. Breaking Bad returns for its fourth season in July of 2011. You can bet there will be a lot more where this came from.

Follow Adam on Twitter, @aepstein

Anatomy of a Scene: Breaking Bad